Are children only assessed on what they have been taught in school?

[summerplease]

I know teachers need to show evidence of a particular level but the dc have been told when ticking off targets that they can only tick them if it's something they've been taught in school.

So for example mine has a really good understanding of negative numbers but they haven't done them in school so they didn't tick that one off. There were quite a few like that and so I feel the levels are not representative but as I say I can see that they need evidence.

the school feels absolutely no obligation to support or assist a child in that endeavor.

Your post is ridiculous but this particularly annoyed me. Schools are NOT ALLOWED to do 11+ prep, whether they felt the obligation or not.

Wellthen:

Sorry, I can see that my comment above is a bit confusing and comes across as 'it's the school's responsibility to prepare pupils for 11+ or tutor them' - I was just reflecting that in terms of the 11+ - schools are slow to point out to parents new or unfamiliar with system that it exists and to indicate to parents of more able pupils that this is an option you should be considering. It's really down to you to find out about through hearsay or pre-existing knowledge of system.

Staff at our school will not comment one way or the other on whether a child is suitable for sitting the grammar entrance exam. And it is this advice that many parents seek - after all teachers are the professionals in this relationship and retain the information to judge whether a DC is working to high enough standard to be a suitable candidate.

Personally I think it is a shame that teachers don't feel comfortable enough to approach a parent of a bright child and say, I don't know if you are aware but there are free state grammar's in this area and you may want to consider entering your DC for their exam. I don't see what the harm is in doing that.

It is that encouragement, for uncertain parents (and we aren't all pushy tiger Mums) that is missing (at our school at least).

HTH

PS - one of the teachers who refused to discuss grammar entrance exams with a friend has turned out to be entering her DC for the grammar exam (saw them recently at an open evening). We said 'hello'. I think we made the point.

PS - one of the teachers who refused to discuss grammar entrance exams with a friend has turned out to be entering her DC for the grammar exam (saw them recently at an open evening). We said 'hello'. I think we made the point.

You made the point? What point? I'm sure the teacher couldn't care less!

At the school where I taught we were told by the head that we were not to discuss with parents their child's suitability/non-suitability for grammar schools. This was after a colleague had told a couple that she felt their DD was not grammar school material. They then paid HUGE amounts of money to tutors every night after school, she passed the 11+ by the smallest of margins and went to grammar. The parents then attempted to sue the school because my colleague had said she wouldn't cope at grammar school. A year or two later we heard the child was struggling enormously with the work and they had taken her out of the grammar school and put her in a non-selective independent school.

When I said they're not allowed to get involved in the tests, I meant it. Teachers should not be discussing it with parents and certainly suggesting it.

You also dont seem to consider the fact that maybe the teacher doesnt WANT to mention it to the parents of bright children because
a) It isnt anything to do with them - I dont know any school where teachers get involved in secondary school choices. Hugely inappropriate
b) They dont like grammar schools
c) They may not live in the area and therefore may not actually know much about the schools
d) I dont know how to stress this enough: They are not allowed.

certainly not even

Getting back to the OP, when extending children, differentiated learning is done within the current topic. For example, if we're doing telling time, then some children may be still working on halves, some on quarters, some on five minutes, some to one minute. There will always be a few students that are beyond that, so they are extended within the topic - eg they may be given problem solving or reading bus/train timetables, etc. I can't go off and start teaching them algebra which is separate component of the curriculum which may not be applied at that grade level. A child may be able to do some basic algebra, which is great, but it won't be assessed because it hasn't been taught in school yet. I may include some notes about the child's understanding if they have demonstrated it in class on several occasions, but there will be no formal assessment and it won't be taught. I need to work within a curriculum for a reason, or you'd have a classroom of students working on different topics at different levels at the same time = chaos. When algebra work is started, then either myself or whoever their teacher is at that time will be able to determine the level the student is working at within that topic and differentiate the learning appropriately.

That makes sense Midnite. Not convinced all teachers differentiate that well even if they should, but it is useful to understand that topics can only be covered as a class.

I agree, not all teachers do it as well as they should. But there are times when a child may have an understanding of a higher level concept, but does not yet understand the more basic aspect of what we're working on, so the parent may feel that we're not differentiating or extending their child, but in fact, we know that the student does not yet have a full understanding of what they need to learn before they can move on.